Parenting Style and Empathy in School Going Children
Sweta*,
Dharmendra Rajak**, Dr. Jai Prakash***
Abstract
Background: Empathy in children is predicted by parenting style. It increases with warmth, support, and sensitivity
of parents for their children's needs. In contrast, children have low empathy with parents playing authoritarian, strict,
or punitive role. Aim: The study aims at evaluating the role of parenting style in developing empathy in children.
Methods: Using random sampling technique, total 100 participants were selected of children going to school
regularly. Tools used were socio-demographic data sheet, parents consent form, Index of Empathy for Children and
Adolescents (IECA) and Children’s Perception of Parenting Scale. Result: Obtained result indicates high level of
empathy in children who perceived their parents’ parenting style as democratic and accepting. In addition, level of
empathy was higher in girls in compare to boys. Conclusion: Results showed that parenting style is one of the
predictors of level of empathy in children.
Address for correspondence: Sweta Ph. D. Scholar Dept. of clinical Psychology RINPAS, Kanke Ranchi-06
E-mail: swetacip@gmail.com
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
INTRODUCTION
It has long been proposed that parent-child relationships (particularly a child’s perceptions of
these relationships) play an important role in child adjustment and psychological development. A
systematic review of parent-child interaction patterns has led to the identification of two primary
dimensions of parental behaviour; one reflecting love versus hostility and the other reflecting
autonomy versus control (Schaefer, 1965a). Children’s perceptions of their parents’ expectations,
however, have received minimal attention. According to socialization theorists (Bandura, 1986),
parents play an important role in promoting and fostering prosocial behaviours in their children
and adolescents.
NEED FOR THE STUDY
The influence of parenting on prosocial and antisocial behaviour has been well documented in
prior research, particularly research on parenting styles and parental disciplinary practices. Prior
researchers confirmed socialization models depicting parenting practices and social cognitions
associated with prosocial behaviours. Recent reports of dramatic incidents of violence and
aggression by adolescents have resulted in a resurgence of interest in understanding the
correlates of prosocial and antisocial behaviours, especially with regard to the impact parents
may have on those behaviours. However, little research has focused on processes underlying the
link between parenting and these behaviours. Although positive child outcomes have been
consistently associated with warm, responsive parenting and discipline strategies including
parental inductions, we still have much to learn about the processes underlying the impact of
parenting on children’s empathetic behaviour.
METHODOLOGY
Aims: The study aims at evaluating the role of parenting style in developing empathy in
children.
Objectives:


To study the association between parenting style and empathy in school going children.
To study the difference between empathy among boys and girls going to school.
Hypothesis:



There will be no significant relationship between parenting style and empathy in school
going children.
There will be no significant difference in perceived parenting style by girls and boys
going to school.
There will be no significant difference between empathy among girls and boys going to
school.
Research design: The study was a school based cross sectional study. The subjects were
recruited for the study by purposing sampling technique.
Sample: Sample consists of total 100 participants (71 girls, 29 boys). Participants were selected
from class 8th, 9th and 10th.
Inclusion criteria:





Students attending school regularly.
Students aged between 13years to <18years.
Both boys and girls.
Studying in standard 8th, 9th and 10th
Students for whom parents gave consent for participating in the study.
Exclusion criteria:


Any psychiatric disorder and physical illness.
GHQ-12 score <3.
TOOLS TO BE USED

Socio-demographic data sheet
It included various socio-demographic variables like age in years, years of education, domicile,
number of family members, etc.

General Health Qustionnaire-12 (Goldberg & Williams, 1991)
Goldberg and Williams (1988) developed it. It is used to screen physical and mental health
problems in the subjects and it consists of twelve items.

Index of Empathy for Children and Adolescents (IECA; Bryant, 1982)
IECA is questionnaire that intended to measure empathy in different situations with emotional
connotations, an individual of the same or opposite sex being the character of the scene/item and
also including neutral statements where empathy is expressed without a gender reference. It
measures the emotional component of empathy. It consists of 22 items: Four with a female
reference, four with a male reference and 14 without a specific reference. Answers were
dichotomous (yes or no), high scores reflecting high empathy. The internal consistency analysis
of Bryant’s instrument (1982) showed a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.67, this value was higher with
age.

Children’s Perception of Parenting Scale (CPPS; Pyari & Kalra, 1995)
The scale has been developed for school going children of ages 14 to 16yrs. The scale consists of
44 items. The scale depicts six areas of children’s of parental styles: Democratic, Autocratic,
Accepting, Rejecting, Over protecting and Over demanding. The test-retest correlation was r .07.
PROCEDURES
Total 100 samples of students studying in classes 8th, 9th and 10th were randomly selected from
the school and after fulfilling the inclusion criteria but not the exclusion criteria were taken up
for the study, after establishing rapport, a clinical interview was held. The school authority and
parents were presented with informed consent and permission to conduct the study was taken.
Necessary socio-demographic details were collected and then the General Health Questionnaire12 was administered to rule out the presence of any physical and mental health problem. Then
Index of Empathy for Children and Adolescents (IECA) and Children’s Perception of Parenting
Scale was administered on the students.
RESULT
Table 1: Correlation between parenting style and empathy
Variables
Democratic
Autocratic
Accepting
Rejecting
Over Protecting
Over Demanding
Cognitive Empathy
.248*
-.070
.202*
-.086
.113
.126
Affective Empathy
.194
-.036
.205*
-.165
.093
.090
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Result indicates significant positive correlation between democratic and accepting parenting
style with cognitive empathy of the participants, whereas there had been negative correlation
between autocratic and rejecting parenting style and cognitive empathy of the participants.
Further, the results show that there had been significant positive correlation between accepting
parenting style and affective empathy and a negative correlation between autocratic and rejecting
parenting style and affective empathy of the participants.
Table 2: Comparison of Parenting Style among Girls and Boys going to school
Variables
Democratic
Autocratic
Accepting
Rejecting
Over Protecting
Over Demanding
Girls
Mean (n=71)
25.752
24.479
29.986
19.282
23.929
23.958
SD
5.684
6.640
7.645
5.119
5.243
5.798
Boys
Mean(n=29)
22.759
26.380
26.586
18.862
22.862
24.276
SD
7.337
4.460
7.120
4.801
5.235
5.561
T
(df=98)
2.176*
1.414
2.057*
.379
.924
.252
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Results show significant difference between perceived parental style among girls and boys going
to school on democratic and accepting areas. The findings suggest that boys are perceiving more
democratic and accepting parental environment they are receiving from their parents than girls.
Table 3: Comparison of empathy in Girls and Boys going to school
Variables
Cognitive Empathy
Affective Empathy
Girls
Mean (n=71)
SD
42.113
10.144
35.535
9.570
Boys
Mean(n=29)
SD
40.035
7.730
36.931
7.773
T
(df=98)
.991 NS
.697 NS
Results show no significant difference on both cognitive and affective domains of IECA among
girls and boys going to school.
DISCUSSION
Results show that there had been 71 girls and 29 boys (100) in the study, out of which 24 were in
class 8 th, 32 in 9 th and 24 in 10 th. Students (mean age = 14.2 years, SD = 1.6), 75 students were
living with their parents and 25 were not living with their parents. 56 students belonged to Hindu
religion, 19 were Muslims and 25 followed other religions.
Study result found a positive correlation between democratic and accepting parenting style with
cognitive empathy of the school going children, and negative correlation between autocratic and
rejecting parenting style and cognitive empathy of the school going children. Result findings
show that there had been significant positive correlation between accepting parenting style and
affective empathy and a negative correlation between autocratic and rejecting parenting style and
affective empathy of the school going children. Results also indicate a positive correlation
between democratic parenting style and affective empathy in school going children though the
findings dose not indicates a significant relationship. Findings of the present study had been
supported by prior research findings of Carlo et al. (2010), and Nasvytienė (2005).
Findings indicated that boys were receiving more democratic and accepting parenting in compare
to girls who received a slight more autocratic and rejecting parenting environment.
Results of the present study suggest no significant difference between girls and boys going to
school on cognitive and affective empathy. The results found are contradictory to studies
conducted by Carlo et al. (2003), Eisenberg & Lennon (1983) and Hoffman (1977). One reason
could be the cultural variances between the studies.
CONCLUSION
Thus, the study concludes that there is a positive relationship between perceived democratic and
accepting parenting style and empathic behaviors in school going children. Though, girls seems
to be more empathic than boys, still a loving and caring environment provided by parents helps
in developing empathic behavior in children.
Reference
Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational behavior and human
decision processes, 50(2), 248-287.
Bryant, B.K. (1982). An index of empathy for children and adolescents. Child Development, 53, 413–
425.
Carlo, G., Hausmann, A., Christiansen, S., & Randall, B. A., (2003). Sociocognitive and Behavioral
Correlates of a Measure of Prosocial Tendencies for Adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence,
23(1), 107-134.
Carlo, G., Mestre, M. V., Samper, P., Tur, A., & Armenta, B. E. (2010). Feelings or cognitions? Moral
cognitions and emotions as longitudinal predictors of prosocial and aggressive
behaviors. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(8), 872-877.
Eisenberg, N., & Lennon, R. (1983). Sex differences in empathy and related capacities. Psychological
Bulletin, 94(1), 100.
Goldberg, D., & Williams, P. (1988). A user’s guide to the General Health Questionnaire. Windsor, UK:
NFER-Nelson.
Hoffman, M. L. (1977). Sex differences in empathy and related behaviours.
Nasvytienė, D., & Zabielienė, R. (2005). Interrelations Between the Level of Intellectual Abilities and
Educational Context in Roma, Jewish, Byelorussian Children Aged 6 to 14 in
Lithuania. Pedagogika, (77), 99-105.
Psychological Bulletin, 84, 712-722.
Pyari A., Kumari R.K. and Bhasin P., Children’s Perception of Parenting Scale, Rakhi Prakashan, Agra
(1995).
Schaefer, E.S. (1965a). Children's
Development, 36, 413–424.
reports
of
parental
behavior:
An
inventory. Child
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
* Ph.D. scholar, Department of Clinical Psychology, RINPAS, Ranchi
** M.Phil scholar, Department of Clinical Psychology, RINPAS, Ranchi
***Additional Professor in Dept. of Clinical Psychology, RINPAS, Ranchi